Why is it so? I always hear that. I am not married yet but I keep it a little challenge to myself to one day disprove that.
I believe with a clever lifestyle of not spending on useless stuff and moving into a cheap region one can easily make that work.
So I say, brazenly and naively ...
New houses have more than doubled in size since the 1950s while holding one less occupant on average.
Houses have a lot more amenities than they used to have, like AC and a clothes dryer instead of a clothes line.
We have torn down about a million SROs* since the 1950s and largely zoned out of existence the ability to build new Missing Middle housing.
We are more car oriented than in the past and cars are typically the second largest expense in a household budget and they've gotten crazy expensive as well.
Having said that, I will recommend the (possibly out of print) book How to survive without a salary by Charles Long in support of your crazy plan. ;)
Thanks for the recommendation!
Things like older cars, smaller houses, location differences, etc. But there are major cost savings that offset, especially with the kids. Single car may work out, less gas, less tax, even less food expenses (many people faced with two incomes eat out more, and prepare food less).
Seeing people do is on $40k salaries means it should be entirely possible on larger ones. Note that if you want to try, it is almost always best for the lower earner to be the one who "stays home" so as to maximize income and minimize tax.
Also "not working a 9-5" is not synonymous with "no income" - there are actual non-scammy work that can be done at home in spare time if desired, and things like teaching exercise class, coaching, also exist.
Your last point is very good as well. I wouldn't want my wife to do nothing, just not slave off at some stupid corporate 9-5 job lessening her, mine and our children's quality of life. There are so many options for quality remote work these days.
We've done this for 17 years now on my salary which has been maybe a little over the national median for software engineers in that time. We live in a median-cost city. Since we are homeschooling, we have avoided communities with high property taxes (we pay 50% less than our neighbors in good school districts).
We've had two cars the entire time, although we'll let them age rather than trade them in for newer models. Our house is modest and we were actually able to pay off the mortgage years early. We max out my 401k and our IRA contributions.
We don't take fancy vacations, which is more of a personal preference rather than a cost cutting decision.
At this point everything is completely commingled financially and we just think of it as our money. Legally that's pretty much the way it is, if we were to get divorced (not going to happen) my wife would be entitled to half of everything (including my 401k). My sister was in a similar situation and I saw this happen in her divorce.
So there are safeguards for the non-working spouse. But still, if there isn't a high degree of trust and openness in the relationship it might not be a good idea. It has been great for our children.
Heck, it can be difficult enough after a couple of extended parental leaves, much less half a marriage.
This is easy to do alone. Bring a partner into your life and slowly but surely you will be seen as a resource to be maxed out and consumed.
I know billionaires that share your dream. Do it. Save yourself. Go now.
Statistically, people in long-term committed relationships have more stable incomes, longer lives, and better outcomes than those who don’t [1]. The direction of causality is somewhat unclear, but that such a relationship exists at all is a fairly strong refutation of your claim.
Which isn’t to say that all of them work out or that it is always sunshine and rainbows. But there is nothing inevitable about the outcome you claim. It’s actually lower probability.
If children aren't a life goal for you, it gets a lot easier.